ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy vs. chemotherapy: comparison of safety and efficacy in adjuvant therapy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of different regimes among patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). Methods: The data of 232 patients (2011-2023) at the Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute&Hospital were analyzed. Patients were divided into 5 different groups: non-AT group (underwent surgical treatment alone), gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin (GEMOX), gemcitabine plus immunotherapy, capecitabine monotherapy and capecitabine plus immunotherapy. Results: Significant differences were observed in both RFS (p = 0.045) and OS (p = 0.0084) between CH group (GEMOX and capecitabine) and non-AT group. No significant difference was observed in RFS (p = 0.73) or OS (p = 0.47) between capecitabine and GEMOX. However, GEMOX group had higher incidence of grade 3-4 adverse reactions(n=7, 17.1%). When comparing the CH and gemcitabine plus immunotherapy and capecitabine plus immunotherapy group, no significant differences were observed in RFS or OS. In subgroup analysis, patients with CA19-9>39 U/ml and ALP>100 U/L may benefited from chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy. Conclusion: Compared to GEMOX, capecitabine showed no significant difference in prognosis but exhibited a more favorable safety profile. Although the addition of immunotherapy did not confer further benefit in the overall cohort, it was associated with improved efficacy in patients with CA19-9 >39 U/ml or ALP >100 U/L. These findings require confirmation in larger studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.